If Charm Person fails...

[taltamir]

I've really already gone over or brought up these points before already.

then we agree?

[Tanuki Tales]

then we agree?

That the guard has no reason to suspect the caster directly unless he does something obviously stupid while casting (and thus should be rightly punished)?

[Setra]

But that's assuming that you can recognize the feeling as magic being cast on you.

Why is that wrong? In a world of magic if you feel an unnatural force, it is a very logical assumption to make that the unnatural is caused by magic.

Since a hostile force is not actually defined in the rules and its not even likely that everyone will readily agree on how feeling a hostile force exactly feels, I'm going to go with Shadowmage's headache idea. A head ache is an extremely common ailment that is brought upon by a multitude of things. What suddenly must narrow all that down to being magic?

Because headaches don't normally feel hostile. This is also assuming the feeling is like a headache, it's very likely anything the DM wants it to be since no one can agree on it. The only thing that's really agreeable is that it's "hostile"

And even if we'll say its a high magic environment, that must mean mages in a city are highly common and then what leads the guard to believe it must be a nearby magic user in a city that could contain dozens if not more of such entities?

Well if they don't know who cast it, they certainly have a right to be suspicious of just about everyone. In the first case, it would seem the guard saw the caster casting the spell in the first place.. so that would put him at suspect #1.

[Tanuki Tales]

Why is that wrong? In a world of magic if you feel an unnatural force, it is a very logical assumption to make that the unnatural is caused by magic.

Because headaches don't normally feel hostile. This is also assuming the feeling is like a headache, it's very likely anything the DM wants it to be since no one can agree on it. The only thing that's really agreeable is that it's "hostile"


Well if they don't know who cast it, they certainly have a right to be suspicious of just about everyone.

But who defines feeling a hostile force as unnatural? The example NPC is a guard, not a merchant. A guard in most cases has to deal with hostile criminals, monsters, etc., putting their life on the line to deal with threats to the city they're guarding. So they'd be pretty used to feeling hostile intent, mystical or otherwise, this sudden feeling is nothing new. (Now if you want to say the guard has lead an easy career... this is just a DM purposely trying to screw the caster).

Like I said, I doubt we'll get an agreement on what the hostile force actually feels like. I'm using headache because that was the first one given in the thread and can be conveyed as the DM not actively playing against the PCs.

Assuming they knew they just resisted a spell.

[Setra]

But who defines feeling a hostile force as unnatural? The example NPC is a guard, not a merchant. A guard in most cases has to deal with hostile criminals, monsters, etc., putting their life on the line to deal with threats to the city they're guarding. So they'd be pretty used to feeling hostile intent, mystical or otherwise, this sudden feeling is nothing new. (Now if you want to say the guard has lead an easy career... this is just a DM purposely trying to screw the caster).

Well then if this is nothing new, then they should already know what a spell being cast on them feels like. They might even raise an alarm "Someone just cast a spell on me!" and be even MORE suspicious than the one who led an easy career.

Like I said, I doubt we'll get an agreement on what the hostile force actually feels like. I'm using headache because that was the first one given in the thread and can be conveyed as the DM not actively playing against the PCs.

This is true, only the DM would really be able to define what it feels like. However I still like to imagine it as quite distinctive, otherwise the description would not be so vague.

Assuming they knew they just resisted a spell.

Well the text can be interpreted that way.. of course it can also be the reverse, it's really too vague, but I would think the fact they put anything there at all would imply they are supposed to know something at the very least.

[Xenogears]

But who defines feeling a hostile force as unnatural? The example NPC is a guard, not a merchant. A guard in most cases has to deal with hostile criminals, monsters, etc., putting their life on the line to deal with threats to the city they're guarding. So they'd be pretty used to feeling hostile intent, mystical or otherwise, this sudden feeling is nothing new. (Now if you want to say the guard has lead an easy career... this is just a DM purposely trying to screw the caster).

Like I said, I doubt we'll get an agreement on what the hostile force actually feels like. I'm using headache because that was the first one given in the thread and can be conveyed as the DM not actively playing against the PCs.

Assuming they knew they just resisted a spell.

Once again I must reiterate that hostile intent does NOT mean the same as hostile force. I might yell at you and you would feel a hostile intent but not a hostile force.

[Tanuki Tales]

Well then if this is nothing new, then they should already know what a spell being cast on them feels like. They might even raise an alarm "Someone just cast a spell on me!" and be even MORE suspicious than the one who led an easy career.

This is true, only the DM would really be able to define what it feels like. However I still like to imagine it as quite distinctive, otherwise the description would not be so vague.


Well the text can be interpreted that way.. of course it can also be the reverse, it's really too vague, but I would think the fact they put anything there at all would imply they are supposed to know something at the very least.

Thanks for misconstruing my words. I clearly said that feeling "hostile intent" would be nothing new. Nowhere in there did I say the NPC gets an ability that automatically lets him recognize when a spell is cast on him.

A creature that successfully saves against a spell that has no obvious physical effects feels a hostile force or a tingle

It says "or a tingle". Not a searing or strong sensation, a tingle. So going off of the alternate feeling it can't be as if a low level Paladin tried to use Detect Good on Asmodeus directly.

Yes, know that something possibly just happened. But this is not the same as knowing something just actively happened to you.

[Tanuki Tales]

Once again I must reiterate that hostile intent does NOT mean the same as hostile force. I might yell at you and you would feel a hostile intent but not a hostile force.

Mind clarifying where it says that hostile intent is different from a feeling of hostile force?

[Setra]

Thanks for misconstruing my words. I clearly said that feeling "hostile intent" would be nothing new. Nowhere in there did I say the NPC gets an ability that automatically lets him recognize when a spell is cast on him.

Well it's a good thing the text says "hostile force".

You did say that he wasn't a guard with a simple career, in a world of high magic that leads to implications that he probably has had people try to fool him with magic before.

Nowhere in the text does it say the npc can't recognize the feeling of magic.

Yes, know that something possibly just happened. But this is not the same as knowing something just actively happened to you.

Why doesn't the guard know something just actively happened rather than the former?

Mind clarifying where it says that hostile intent is different from a feeling of hostile force?

The part where it says "Hostile Force" rather than "Hostile intent"

[Tanuki Tales]

Well it's a good thing the text says "hostile force".

You did say that he wasn't a guard with a simple career, in a world of high magic that leads to implications that he probably has had people try to fool him with magic before.

Nowhere in the text does it say the npc can't recognize the feeling of magic.

Why doesn't the guard know something just actively happened rather than the former?

The part where it says "Hostile Force" rather than "Hostile intent"

Mind also clarifying what the feeling of magic is and where it is in the rules please?

Why does he know? What leads to him know actively someone just did something? Does he have "Anticipate Spent Action" as a supernatural ability?

And you did not answer my question at all, thanks.

[Setra]

Mind also clarifying what the feeling of magic is and where it is in the rules please?

I've never seen it.

Thus "Nowhere in the text does it say the npc can't recognize the feeling of magic."

If you find it, please share.

Why does he know? What leads to him know actively someone just did something?

Why doesn't he?

And you did not answer my question at all, thanks.

There is a difference between a hostile intent and a hostile force, if you can't tell the difference it's not my problem.

[Tanuki Tales]

I've never seen it.

Thus "Nowhere in the text does it say the npc can't recognize the feeling of magic."

If you find it, please share.


Why doesn't he?


There is a difference between a hostile intent and a hostile force, if you can't tell the difference it's not my problem.

So you're going to try to use the "Absence of Evidence is not Evidence of Absence" argument? Nice.

And this stops being what the rules say and what you think they should be.

And it's not my problem you're trying to hand off your own opinions and interpretations as RAW.

[Setra]

[QUOTE=Bendraesar;7633227]So you're going to try to use the "Absence of Evidence is not Evidence of Absence" argument? Nice. [quote]No, I'm just shifting the burden of proof.

And this stops being what the rules say and what you think they should be.

Doesn't sound any different than what you were trying to do.

And it's not my problem you're trying to hand off your own opinions and interpretations as RAW.

Same to you.

[taltamir]

Because headaches don't normally feel hostile.

Mine certainly do :)

[Tanuki Tales]

[QUOTE=Setra;7633250][QUOTE=Bendraesar;7633227]So you're going to try to use the "Absence of Evidence is not Evidence of Absence" argument? Nice.

No, I'm just shifting the burden of proof.

Doesn't sound any different than what you were trying to do.


Same to you.

And I'm done with you. Come back when you're ready to discuss the implications of actual printed rules in social contexts of the game instead of what you as a DM would do to actively play against your players.

[Yuki Akuma]

You seem to enjoy accusing anyone who disagrees with you as playing against their players. That's not very polite.

[Tanuki Tales]

You seem to enjoy accusing anyone who disagrees with you as playing against their players. That's not very polite.

Nor is questioning another player's mental aptitude because they disagree with you. But I haven't called you or Xenogears on your barely subtle attempts at that thus far.

That though is off topic so please return to it so that we won't give a moderator reason to come in here.

[Lord Thurlvin]

And I'm done with you. Come back when you're ready to discuss the implications of actual printed rules in social contexts of the game instead of what you as a DM would do to actively play against your players.

Whether or not the DM is actively playing against the players depends heavily on how experienced the guard is and whether or not he saw the caster actually cast the spell, which is what was suggested in the original post. If the guard is a green newbie, the "hostile force" will be more easily dismissed than if he were experienced with dealing with magic. Unless he were experienced, it shouldn't make him hostile, but I could see it moving him down one attitude. A DM should decide whether what he is guarding would warrant more experience on the guard's part and rule accordingly.

[Tanuki Tales]

Whether or not the DM is actively playing against the players depends heavily on how experienced the guard is and whether or not he saw the caster actually cast the spell, which is what was suggested in the original post. If the guard is a green newbie, the "hostile force" will be more easily dismissed than if he were experienced with dealing with magic. Unless he were experienced, it shouldn't make him hostile, but I could see it moving him down one attitude. A DM should decide whether what he is guarding would warrant more experience on the guard's part and rule accordingly.

Well, the original post did only say the caster was "in front".

I think a lot of this could be ended or avoided if the OP was here to further clarify the particulars of the scenario.

[Lord Thurlvin]

Well, the original post did only say the caster was "in front".

I think a lot of this could be ended or avoided if the OP was here to further clarify the particulars of the scenario.

Most of "this" seems to be stemming from different interpretations of a fairly vague sentence in the Player's Handbook.

[BarbarianNina]

Charm Person, done right, is an awesome spell (especially if cast on good roleplayers). Done wrong, it's seriously overpowered.

I pretty much agree with what most people have said; the guard will be suspicious, more or less so depending on how subtly you cast the spell and how much he knows about magic. The wizard will realize you cast Charm Person, but will rationalize it.

If I was DMing and a player walked straight up to a guard, stood in front of him, and cast Charm Person, I would point out that the guard, if he succeeds at his save, is going to realize the player tried to cast something on him. If the player chooses, he can take that risk.

Also, even if Charm succeeds, it's not Dominate. I've let PCs get away with continuing to save the day while Charmed by the BBEG's top henchman because they convincingly argued that stopping the BBEG was in the henchman's best interest.

[Glass Mouse]

Basically, this all comes down to whether or not we define "malevolent force" as easily recognizable as magic.
"[the target] cannot deduce the exact nature of the attack" (form the d20srd link) can mean a variety of things, from "wouldn't know if it's a spell or a headache" to "can deduce school of magic but not excact spell".

Which means; as usual, the rules are open for interpretation. Hurray! Aren't D&D great?

Edit: Wow, one new page of posts while I was writing, and now I'm more or less outdated. Meh. Learn to type faster, Mouse...

[Alaris]

I believe it was best stated by the second poster in the thread.

The person who saw you cast it on them, even if they interpreted what it was, would think that it was their friend that cast charm person on them.

"They cast Charm Person on me because it was necessary. Afterall, my friend wouldn't cast Charm Person on me if it wasn't, right? He's my friend afterall."

[Reluctance]

Most of "this" seems to be stemming from different interpretations of a fairly vague sentence in the Player's Handbook.

Untrue. It's a bit of information they thought was redundant in the SRD. Check P. 177 in your PHB and see for yourself.

And while people are checking their books, P. 142 in the DMG couldn't hurt, either.

[Tanuki Tales]

Untrue. It's a bit of information they thought was redundant in the SRD. Check P. 177 in your PHB and see for yourself.

And while people are checking their books, P. 142 in the DMG couldn't hurt, either.

I retract my opinion on whether the mook knows that magic has been used on it by RAW. I still stand though that in a high magic setting that it would not necessarily act any more negatively towards a PC without actively knowing they were at least a caster if not possibly the one who cast it.

[Yuki Akuma]

How often do people hide the fact that they're a spellcaster? I mean, really?

[Tanuki Tales]

How often do people hide the fact that they're a spellcaster? I mean, really?

Depends how smart they are. A hat of disguise or not dressing like your class is both cheap and easily done.

[Lord Thurlvin]

Untrue. It's a bit of information they thought was redundant in the SRD. Check P. 177 in your PHB and see for yourself.

And while people are checking their books, P. 142 in the DMG couldn't hurt, either.

That was what I was going off of to begin with. The problem is what exactly a "hostile force or tingle" would mean. How strong is it? Does it feel like a sudden wave of paranoia? Is it immediately recognizable if the target has been subjected to a charm spell before? Would someone who has never been the target of a charm spell be able to understand it was a spell?
It really comes down to the DM's interpretation, and the problem so far has been whether or not the guard acting more suspicious towards everyone new he meets is the DM being unfair or not.

[Pigkappa]

I didn't actually speak about a guard because it is possible that a guard wouldn't think about these kind of spells, and not get really upset. But except at very low levels (1-2 I'd say), PCs have to deal with uncommon people. It won't be a problem to deal with a level-1-fighter guard; it will mostly be skilled professionists (elite guards, other adventurers, priests, and the like).

Now, if I were a moderately rich evil monk/wizard/warrior/whatever with a pair of class levels, and a bunch of adventurers comes to talk to me and I suddenly notice that I succeeded at resisting a spell, I wouldn't waste time before fleeing or attacking them. That makes quite sense in my opinion; a not-totally-idiot guy in the world of D&D knows that there are lots of ways to be killed, and should be as careful as possible. If your character felt he's just resisted a spell and doesn't know where that came from, wouldn't you flee as soon as possible? If you saw someone casting something at you and feel you resisted, wouldn't you just attack him or flee, instead of asking him what was he doing?

[Reluctance]

That was what I was going off of to begin with. The problem is what exactly a "hostile force or tingle" would mean. How strong is it? Does it feel like a sudden wave of paranoia? Is it immediately recognizable if the target has been subjected to a charm spell before? Would someone who has never been the target of a charm spell be able to understand it was a spell?
It really comes down to the DM's interpretation, and the problem so far has been whether or not the guard acting more suspicious towards everyone new he meets is the DM being unfair or not.

The bit I was pointing to in the PHB specifically said that the NPC knew that a spell was cast on them. The SRD cut off the example. (Although the fact that you have to make a Spellcraft check to ID the exact spell shows that most NPCs would only know "someone cast a spell on me", not "someone cast a charm spell on me". I'd rule that they can tell a spell that requires a Fort save from one that requires a Will save, but there's no RAW to back that up.)

As to the guard, I'd say that being affected by "a hostile or malevolent force" would make anybody edgy. Edgy enough to drop them from neutral to unfriendly or even hostile? Probably not, unless they had good reason to believe that the PC was the source of this assault. (But also keeping in mind that in a magic-filled world, anybody making funny movements or saying gibberish at the moment a magical attack happens is going to be treated as well as the guy making bomb jokes at the airport.) Being the recent subject of a magical attack would definitely make somebody edgy in the RP sense, though, and most likely edgy enough to impose a circumstance penalty on diplomacy attempts. Anything more than that is entirely situational.

Edit: Also, what Pigkappa said. I wonder how many PCs, upon being told "make a Will save", would continue talking to the guy right in front of them as if nothing had happened.